Excellent article. This has been added to the front pages.

There was a time when fatherless children were either born to prostitutes or soldiers. Since there are very few wars now, all that's left are prostitutes.

There are many tv shows and commercials that show fathers as useless and incompetent. Children learn about the world from a variety of sources and tv is one of those sources. However, the tv is as much a reflection of the world as it influences the world. Fatherlessness comes mostly from mothers breaking up families because they are rewarded for doing so. Here are some of the benefits off the top of my head:

- no need to share the children with the father, her decisions are now the final word. He will be informed of her decision and probably be shamed into paying for them (ie, Julie needs cheerleading accessories)

- child alimony will likely net her far more spending money than she had when the father lived in the home and no one is there to question how she spends it

- she will gain the house for herself, she can now party hard with other men or just her friends in her new house (that he is likely paying for)

- she will gain the family car and he will likely keep the payment

- she will gain the ability to use the children against him, the ultimate form of vengeance. All those times he made her mad, well now she has the ultimate power.

- she will have a high chance of getting state benefits in the form of food stamps, medicaid, housing assistance, legal assistance, etc... once his income is no longer considered

This folks is what has to change before the tv will, it reflects reality. You make staying together seem more appealing than splitting up and tv will have to reflect good families again with competent and respected fathers.

There are too many incentives for women to create absentee fathers that you can't blame the phenomenon solely on men.

The role of a father must be protected. Our judicial system needs to overcome gender bias that places all blame for divorce on the father or male partner.

This is one reason why I have been so pro-active in reaching out to help men in divorce. I recognize that defending fathers' rights in divorce is not just about their share of assets and their immediate family, but also because insuring that fathers' rights are protected has a direct impact on improving the world in which our children are raised. Any man’s loss of a child diminishes mankind.


antimisandry.com Absentee Fathers a Growing Epidemic in America

Agreed.

But..... let us not get carried by weasel words.

'Absentee' father is one such.

There is a 'dimension' of the fact of a father not being there, which has death and duty at one end, various coercions and manipulations in the middle area and social encouragement, especially amongst the pooer and less educated , at the other end. 'Absentee' does not cover the vast majority and tends to be associated with an act of culpable willfulness.

Brilliant column. I'm desperate to stay in my children's life even though divorce is happening. Child custody needs to be reformed because I now have to wage a war to show I'm a fit father deserving of equal custody. Kids definitely need a father but society has now dubbed us optional. At the expense of our children.

One in three children in America, according to the U.S. Census, live in homes where their biological father is absent.

I recognize that this trend is worsening not becoming better, reaching epidemic proportions that must be addressed.

yes ! sad but too true !!! Jefferey M Leving

of course this social disaster is no accident but the attainment of the Holy Grail of the destruction of the nuclear family , the most hated of hated institution, by incessant feminit agitprop pushed by the new age Marxist feminit wimyn and their co opted lickspittles the manginas who enforce the edicts and ruling of the new age star chamber the misandrist Family Court;

there should be a caption above its entrace portals

"abandon all hope all ye fathers who enter here"

I have been de-programming my son of the brainwashing by his schooling and the mass media which have no doubt partly infected his sentience, by showing him posts from this forum and the risible episodes of the feminit cultural antics presented in the media as Kosher as when a wimyn set alight her husband ( er partner ) because she belived he was cheating on her - the guy took two weeks to die but the judge said no custodial sentence necessary cause she had suffered enough

Quote from JamesM

Brilliant column. I'm desperate to stay in my children's life even though divorce is happening. Child custody needs to be reformed because I now have to wage a war to show I'm a fit father deserving of equal custody. Kids definitely need a father but society has now dubbed us optional. At the expense of our children.

Welcome James. It is so true that men need to wage a bloody court battle in order to say in their children's lives. I've been through the crucible of the family court a number of times. One Dad I know likened the process of getting access to his children to "tilting at windmills", the often used phrase from Don Quixote. He was what is know in the MRA lingo as a blue pill. Getting shared parenting rights for men is a formidable task in today's family courts. I went through Hell and back a few times due to a system that brands fathers as less then capable at best and violent and abuse at worst.

Stick to your guns. It is a battle of wills and a battle of resolve. Use everything at your disposal. The very design of the system is to wear out men seeking to be part of their kids lives. Feminists and their supports designed the system to remove men from the equation of raising children with the exception of financial support.

Fighting a corrupt family court system is what opened my eyes to the red pill reality and moved me to become a MRA. The fight you face will not be easy, it will be emotionally draining and screw with your mind. That is exactly what the family courts have become under feminist dogma. They want you to give up, roll over and be a good boy and take what ever excrement they throw at you.

The good news is that you have legions of supporters here and at other sites specifically targeting fathers rights. If you want to remain part of your kids lives, get your armor on and prepare for a really nasty fight. You can win, but it will take perseverence and the willingness to concede a battle to win the war.

Quote from Percy

The role of a father must be protected. Our judicial system needs to overcome gender bias that places all blame for divorce on the father or male partner.

This is one reason why I have been so pro-active in reaching out to help men in divorce. I recognize that defending fathers' rights in divorce is not just about their share of assets and their immediate family, but also because insuring that fathers' rights are protected has a direct impact on improving the world in which our children are raised. Any man’s loss of a child diminishes mankind.


antimisandry.com Absentee Fathers a Growing Epidemic in America

Agreed.

But..... let us not get carried by weasel words.

'Absentee' father is one such.

There is a 'dimension' of the fact of a father not being there, which has death and duty at one end, various coercions and manipulations in the middle area and social encouragement, especially amongst the pooer and less educated , at the other end. 'Absentee' does not cover the vast majority and tends to be associated with an act of culpable willfulness.

That is a crucially important point, Percy. There are several reasons for a living father to be absent from his children, of which deliberate, selfish and uncaring action by the father is only one. Here are some of the others, none of which in my book makes the father worthy of any blame:

1) He never wanted to be a father in the first place, but the contraceptive device (whether his or hers, or both) failed, and the woman decided to continue with the pregnancy - which is of course exclusively her choice, in which the man has no say and is entirely at her mercy if she chooses to make him a father against his will;

2) He was tricked into fatherhood by deceitful action by the woman - there are several ways for her to steal his sperm, and of course such action is never illegal. Interestingly, sperm is the one substance that is incapable of being stolen under any circumstances, despite its value;

3) He isn't the father in the first place, so ought to have no responsibility whatsoever to the child; except that a corrupt and biased law forces him into that responsibility and makes him pay for the actions of a lying and cheating woman. A perfect example of blaming and punishing the innocent while rewarding the guilty; and of course

4) He is the father and always wanted to be, but is forced out of that role and separated from his children by the combined actions of a vengeful mother and the same corrupt and biased legal system.

Now a question: what else have all the above got in common? Answer: none of them will be acknowledged by politicians, by the legal system and the parasites that infest it, or by the mainstream media. Or indeed by any of the mothers who pull those tricks. Those people all see only the one reason for men to be apart from their children: because they are feckless and worthless, and portraying all absent fathers in that way maintains the deceivers in their comfortable and lucrative prejudices.

There is a largely unacknowledged and largely silent war going on in our society; it is the war for the rights of men to share fairly in the lives of their own children. There are many powerful and vested interests fighting hard against fathers having any such rights; and the people I describe in the preceding paragraphs are the people leading that fight. Against them are millions of ordinary people, including most fathers and many mothers who recognise the importance for children of both sexes to have a close and committed dad.

But the fact that such a war has occurred demonstrates the sickness that pervades our society, and how far we have drifted from both natural justice and common sense.

Maybe another term to include in the discussion would be "outcast fathers". The mechanisms for expelling men from a relevant and influential place in their own children's lives are present throughout the society, and men in these situations have few real resources to draw on to back their rights. No issues of violence or neglect or unfitness even have to be proven, a woman has only to self-appoint herself into the victim cult and the power of the system is at her fingertips. Having done nothing wrong, a man is the defendant from the beginning, and the woman's actions are seldom challenged, her ways and means never held to account.

I am an everyday daddy to one child and an outcast absentee in another's. When I do see the one I don't have any influence with, it's hard to believe the difference, the skepticism and distrust he has, when my younger daughter is so utterly devoted and trusting toward me. Two different women made two different choices about me, the same man, and I am not even capable of the things the one has accused me of for my son's entire life. But the system wasn't listening. It already had its mind made up.

Kidnapping and Sex Discrimination: Steps 1 and 2 to single motherhood - Blogs - antimisandry.com

I believe in the Bible. In the Bible there is this story that occurs soon after the beginning of the world. It is about two people, Adam and Eve. In this story, Eve is deceived into doing something that she was commanded not to do, but Adam wasn't. I believe this is why men have such similar views while women can have views as different as the arctic and Amazon.

You can thank the growing single motherhood for that.

It's going to keep growing because new age women are given incentives by the feminist filth and Hollywood trollops, to keep fathers away from the kids!

I don't know why I didn't address this before, but I have come too far down this road of trying to get back in to my son's life against a wall of resistance and hate and bigotry from his mother and her family, to let some expert publish an article like this and use an offensive and judgmental headline calling me and other men like me an "epidemic." HOW DARE YOU!

You want to call someone or something an epidemic? How about the mothers who violate criminal statutes on the books this very minute making it a felony to abduct children away from a parent, and then go on to extract every benefit from the system and unexamined heroine-worship from the culture?

Perhaps because calling the real problem what it is would piss off the women in your life?